(The electronic version of the following
Journal
of the Legislative Assembly is for information purposes
only.
The printed version remains the official version.)

Daily Sitting 12

Friday, December 1, 2000.

10 o'clock a.m.

Prayers.

Mr. Speaker delivered the following ruling with respect to
the Question of Privilege raised on Tuesday last by the
Member for ShediacCap-Pelé:

STATEMENT BY SPEAKER

Honourable Members:

At this time, I am prepared to rule on the Question of
Privilege raised on Tuesday last by the Member for
ShediacCap-Pelé.

In stating the question of privilege, the Member for
ShediacCap-Pelé gave notice of motion
pursuant to Standing Rule 9(2). Standing Rule 9(3) states
that the Speaker shall not accept such a motion unless
satisfied that there is a prima facie case that a
breach of privilege has been committed and that the matter
is being raised at the earliest opportunity.

I have reviewed the comments of the Honourable Member, as
well as those of other Members. I want to thank you for
your comments.

In presenting his question of privilege, the Member for
ShediacCap-Pelé submits that the delay by the
Minister of Training and Employment Development in
providing important information to the House, namely an
actuarial study relevant to a Bill before the House,
amounts to a breach of privilege.

The Member states that the actuarial study in question had
been requested from Government both in a Notice of Motion
some six months earlier and at a meeting of the Standing
Committee on Public Accounts and the fact that it was not
provided until after the House had commenced its
consideration of Bill 10 demonstrates a contempt for
Members on both sides of the House.

I have reviewed the various authorities on the matter of
contempt and will repeat what I stated in a ruling of
April 25th this year.

Contempts are offences against the authority or dignity of
the House. The 22nd edition of Erskine May's Parliamentary
Practice at pages 121 and 122, under the heading of
"Contempt", and the subheading "Obstructing Members of
Either House in the Discharge of their Duty", refers
generally to such offences as the arrest of Members,
molestation of Members while in the execution of their
duties, or on account of their conduct in Parliament;
attempts by improper means to influence Members in their
parliamentary conduct, i.e., bribery; attempted
intimidation of Members; or private solicitation of
Members.

The matters raised by the Member for
ShediacCap-Pelé do not, in my opinion, fall
in the general category of contempt as contemplated by the
authorities.

It has always been recognized that Members of the Assembly
should be granted as much access as possible to documents
requested from government, to ensure that Members are well
informed on matters before the Assembly and that Members
are able to participate in debate in a meaningful way.
Although Members may request documents from Government
through notices of motions, this does not confer upon
Members an automatic right to receive the documents
requested.

The practice of this House and of other Assemblies clearly
establishes that it is the prerogative of Government to
withhold a document it deems privileged. The Government
House Leader, in his submission, states that the study in
question was a confidential and privileged document that
the Minister of Training and Employment Development was
under no obligation to table but, who chose to do so to
facilitate debate on the Bill.

The Member for ShediacCap-Pelé further
contends that a minister who introduces a major bill is
also responsible for tabling any information necessary to
enable Members on both sides to discuss the matter in a
reasonable and informed fashion.

However, unless there is an Order of the House, there is
no Standing Rule or other legal requirement which requires
a Minister of the Crown to provide the House in advance
with all documents that may be considered to be applicable
to a matter under debate or to legislation that is under
consideration.

In my opinion the Member has not established a prima
facie case that a breach of privilege has been
committed and accordingly I will not allow the Member's
motion to go forward.

The following Bill was introduced and read a first time:

By Hon. Mr. Lord,

Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Beaverbrook Auditorium
Act.

Ordered that the said Bill be read a second time at the
next sitting.

The following Private Bill was introduced and read the
first time:

By Mr. Forbes,

Bill 17, An Act Respecting the Canadian Information
Processing Society of New Brunswick.

Ordered referred to the Standing Committee on Private
Bills.

Mr. S. Graham gave Notice of Motion 31 that on Tuesday,
December 5, 2000, he would move the following resolution,
seconded by Mr. Allaby:

WHEREAS the winter months are now upon us;

WHEREAS the disconnection of electricity continues to be a
serious problem for New Brunswickers living on low or
fixed incomes;

WHEREAS other jurisdictions have seen fit to protect their
residential customers from disconnects during the winter
months;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this Legislature urge the
government to instruct NB Power to adopt a policy of not
disconnecting residential electricity between the dates of
November 1 and March 31.

Mr. S. Graham requested the unanimous consent of the House
to add Motion 31 to the Order Paper to be considered on
Tuesday, December 5, 2000, following consideration of
Motion 1, and unanimous consent being denied, Notice of
Motion 31 was deferred to Thursday, December 7, 2000.

Hon. Mr. E. Robichaud announced that following second
reading, the House would resolve itself into a Committee
of the Whole to consider legislation; namely, Bills 11 and
13; and time permitting, the House would resolve itself
into a Committee of Supply to consider the Supplementary
Estimates.

The Order being read for second reading of Bill 14, New
Brunswick Income Tax Act, a debate arose thereon.

And the debate being ended, and the question being put
that Bill 14 be now read a second time, it was resolved in
the affirmative.

Accordingly, Bill 14, New Brunswick Income Tax Act,
was read a second time and ordered referred to the
Committee of the Whole House.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole
with Mr. Ashfield in the chair.

And after some time, Mr. Bernard took the chair.

And after some time, Mr. Ashfield resumed the chair.

And after some further time, Mr. Speaker resumed the chair
and Mr. Ashfield, the Chairman, after requesting that Mr.
Speaker revert to the Order of Presentations of Committee
Reports, reported:

That the Committee had directed him to report the
following Bill agreed to as amended:

Bill 11, An Act to Amend the All-Terrain Vehicle
Act.

And that the Committee had directed him to report progress
on the following Bill:

Bill 13, An Act to Amend the Education Act.

And the Committee asked leave to make a further report.

Pursuant to Standing Rule 78.1, Mr. Speaker put the
question on the motion deemed to be before the House, that
the report be concurred in, and it was resolved in the
affirmative.

And then, 2.30 o'clock p.m., the House adjourned.

The following documents, having been deposited with the
Clerk of the House, were deemed laid upon the table of the
House pursuant to Standing Rule 39:

Documents requested in Notices of Motions 14 and 18 -
November 30, 2000Supplementary Estimates 1999-2000 Volume III
Transmitted by Message of Her Honour
The Lieutenant-Governor - November 30, 2000